Effective Strategies for Managing Issues in Performance Appraisals

This essay delves into the critical strategies for managing issues associated with performance appraisals (PA) within the context of Human Resource Management (HRM). It begins by highlighting the importance of employees in organizational success and the role of PA in aligning employee contributions with business goals. However, the essay acknowledges the challenges and dissatisfaction often associated with PA systems, referencing historical perspectives and research findings. The core of the essay examines various strategies to mitigate these issues, including the implementation of 360-degree feedback, performance management frameworks, ethical evaluation practices, and employee engagement initiatives. It emphasizes the need for a strong sense of direction, meaningful feedback, and ethical conduct in PA systems. The essay also explores the benefits of integrating PA with broader performance management processes and the importance of managerial practices, appraisal system support, and system design. Ultimately, the essay recommends that HRM professionals establish consistent and well-reviewed PA systems to classify competencies and promote development across all organizational departments. This paper emphasizes the importance of ethical considerations, employee involvement, and fair evaluation processes to ensure that PA systems effectively support both individual employee growth and organizational objectives.

Human Resource Managment
Student name
[DATE]
institutional affiliation(S)

1
Strategies to manage issues associated with performance appraisals
In contemporary organization, employees are considered as a significant part while
determining organization survival. Employees contribution are as regarded as an ultimate
asset that ensures human resource management (HRM) functions are in accord with planned
strategies required for attaining business goals. The relationship between performance
appraisal (PA) and human resource strategies are used as a tool for achieving organizational
vision as it connects employees with the organization through communication, flexible
promotions and maximizing employee potentials. However, very often employees do not
seem happier with the practice of PA that impacts organization’s image. In 1972, Douglas
McGregor published an emblem in Harvard Business Review stating, “An Uneasy Look at
Performance Appraisal” (Mathison & Vinja, 2010, p. 112). This became a starting point in
organisational behaviour concept regarding PA issues that demanded an improvised strategy
to manage issues associated with it. This essay will conduct an answer to the essay topic by
reviewing books and published articles to discuss why PA failed and how developed
strategies can manage issues associated with it which can fulfil HRM objectives in managing
employees.
According to Kondrasuk (2011), the use of PA became institutionalised to monitor
and improve organisational output during Industrial Revolution times when bureaucratic
companies proliferated. Initially, PA were used to link performance and reactivity for poor
performance by HRM that focused more upon punishing employees for performing poorly
for motivating them to achieve higher performance goals. However, the PA systems began to
evolve lately due to many issues seen in it that made many organisations HRM adopt other
strategies to improve workplace performance (Sharma, 2010). Within last thirty years, many

2
scholars and researchers have vigorously analysed and examined the effectiveness behind PA
within HRM concept, but unfortunately no consensus reveals what system meets the best for
achieving desired objectives. A research conducted by Rolle & Klingner (2012) of employees
working in a public service company finds that more than 17% of respondents reported PA as
a negative opportunity especially in training and development process by HRM that
constituted as a barrier between PA and long-term career goals. Though PA often assists
HRM about how to shape employee performance according to organisational objectives, it
often does not potentially prove as an effective measure for management that tends HR
managers think about developing other strategies that can evaluate employee’s performance
in more efficient manner (Ahmad & Bujang, 2013).
It is usually conceded that PA system are used by HRM to fulfil two basic
organisational function: developmental and administrative (Kondrasuk, 2011). The one stated
function is to learn whether employees are performing well and for assisting them to perform
better ways. This function is usually carried by HR manager of the firm by giving guidance
and counselling. The second function of PA is to set goals or purpose along with establishing
administrative decisions like what must be awarded to whom for improving employee
performance after conducting other validation tests. The second role of PA puts HR managers
in the place of judge who supervises what needs to done for achieving goals. However, for
HR managers, achieving both the goals can create conflicts between evaluator and appraisee.
It becomes very difficult for the managers to concurrently guide or act as a counsellor while
evaluating or judging at the same time (Farrell, 2013). According to Kadam (2012), an
evaluator needs to be open minded alongside admitting short falls to guide individuals who
are in need of help rather than judging them by cutting off pay or reducing other promotional
opportunities. Another issue faced by contemporary organisations HRM is inconsistency seen
in evaluation process that can throw entire PA system off. For example, additional issue

3
arising due to diversified and conflicting view of evaluator and appraisee regarding the
purpose behind PA. Henceforth, many contemporary organisations and SHRM are
considering various strategies that can potentially minimise issues occurring due to PA
systems (Cappelli & Tavis, 2016).
According to Sillup & Klimberg (2010), ethical treatment of employees has been
enhanced by recent environmental movements and civil rights that have caused rise in moral
expectations within organisations and creation of new workplace environment for conducting
businesses that complies with legislative acts. The author pinpoints various code of conducts
and Civil rights that gives access to employees for comprehending legal workplace codes and
working under contractual assurance required for job security. On the other hand, SHRM of
many corporations are getting motivated by global competition emergence since past few
decades and thus acknowledges PA implementation to eliminate ethical issues arising from
PA systems. However, such considerations may require more time along with enabling
certain challenges in front of organisation’s managers as insufficient time provided for PA
may result in making unfair appraisals that may jeopardize employee’s long-term
development (Gogoi & Baruah, 2016). This review in literature suggests that ethical
implications in PA must be considered by HRM for enabling PA strategies that contains
ethics in performance evaluation acts. Ethical PA system will provide organisations with
integration of four basic ethical guidelines while evaluating employees: respect for every
employee, mutual understanding between employee and evaluator, fairness in PA evaluation
system and finally, transparency in appraisals related decisions. Therefore, it is been
suggested by researchers that organisations must consider efficient PA system in terms of
reliability, sensitivity, practicality, relevancy and acceptability (Sillup & Klimberg, 2010).
Application of 360-degree strategy in PA is one way that can help HRM in involving
greater number of employees in every aspect of organisational management. This approach

4
not only minimises traditional PA system issues, but also enables HR managers in making a
close comparison between weaknesses and strengths from alternative perspectives to gain
more accurate and rounded view of individual’s performance. According to Kanaslan & Iyem
(2016), 360-degeree feedback, also referred to as multi-source assessment includes those
processes in which individuals’ performance is assessed and provided with feedback by
giving numbers to them. This may include managers, colleagues, subordinates and customers
even and thus is most commonly described as 180-degree feedback strategy. 360-degree in
PA helps organisations in building effective relationships while making thorough assessment
of individual performance. On the other hand, subordinates being appraised and provided
with structured feedback recognises dispassionate decisions from their supervisors. Some
individuals can be directly assessed from their immediate managers or HRM of the
organisations while others may get evaluated by press, suppliers, peers and subordinates. This
strategy can even reduce biasness from management decisions found in traditional PA system
by removing top-down ratings and replacing with multisource assessments (Sharma, 2010).
However, Jagtap (2017) argues that 360-degree feedback process may come with additional
drawbacks like threatening receiver’s performance. The HR managers or policy facilitators
who utilise multi-source feedback strategy may focus more upon appraisee’s weaknesses
along with making difficult for the managers in enabling new responsibilities while they
perform feedback processes. Moreover, this strategy can demotivate employees through
negative feedback received which implies HR managers to use this strategy wisely after
ensuring that decision taken are unbiased and consistent so that identified PA related issues
are managed efficiently.
Performance management (PM) related strategies are gaining much prominence in
recent literature that states PA systems needs to be carried in organisations as a whole
performance management process rather than depending solely upon individuals’ appraisals.

5
“Maximizing performance is a priority for most organizations today, and performance
management is a part of a link between organizational strategy and results” ( Toppo & Prusty,
2012, p. 4). Indeed, the definition of PM itself defines specific objectives behind it for
employee’s welfare as well as organisational development backed up by job description that
takes into account employees’ normal expectation also. If organisational objectives are met
after reviewing employee’s personal development related objectives, bonuses or
remuneration are automated by HR departments alongside making performance related
information accessible to the top executives in the form of performance diary. Such
explanations made in literature reveal that PM strategy in HRM can potentially meet the
shortcomings seen in PA system. Daoanis (2012) believes that PM is created to share a
common vision, purposes and aims that helps employees in understanding and recognising
their part while performing for their organisation, thereby improving and managing the
performance of both organisations and individuals. PM is typically reliant on PA and is
considered as wider and encompassing process that eliminates issues associated with PA
activities. Presently, PM integrated with PA systems are been seen providing organisations
with more successes and benefits, however, they can prove to be best working if based on
business goals that are driven by organisational strategies (Sharma, 2010).
Many authors have made studies on PA processes to determine which strategy suits
the best for enabling successful PA systems in organisation’s HRM. Cintrón & Flaniken
(n.d.) finds that a successful PA system, free of any issues can be divided into three critical
components: managerial practice, appraisal system support and system design. Since system
design component is associated with clearly defined purpose behind conducting PA, it makes
employees understand the reasons behind PA and specific organisational goals. The setting of
goals allows HR managers in selection and recruitment processes by evaluating performance
criteria that can potentially serve organisational objectives along with increasing HR

6
managers motivation for carrying appraisals in proper way. The effective system design
strategy enables HR managers with inputs from concerning employees job design,
development along with choice of PA criteria that can be used in appraisal (Sharma, 2010).
This helps in promoting acceptance of ownership of PA system that increases employee
motivation and effectiveness of the organisations. Employee involvement is another
significant tool that increases job related autonomy and proves as a prerequisite for
employees’ development. Furthermore, employee engagement gives employees a voice in
appraisal related processes that gives HR managers an opportunity to conduct performance
ratings, verbal or written feedback with which employees agree or disagree. Which means, if
employees are convinced that PA system is fair, ethical and unbiased, they will acknowledge
their performance ratings alongside unfavourable feedbacks made (Hossein, Saleh, Iman &
Jaafar, 2012).
An ideal PA system is not a form, but a format that involves setting of employees and
organisational expectations, having employees perform to achieve expectations and
application of assessment to benefit organisations. The above essay finds many ways that can
potentially manage issues in current PA systems conducted in organisations and HRM and
suggests that PA system must have strong sense of direction, meaningful feedback and ethical
conduct. For such, this essay provided with various strategies like 360-degree feedback,
performance management, ethical evaluation, employee empowerment, engagement and
other managerial implications that can manage PA related issue effectively. At the end, this
essay recommends HR managers to establish performance appraisal system in a consistent
way so that it can get assessed and reviewed for classifying competencies and development
across every organisation’s department.

7
References
Ahmad, R. & Bujang, S., 2013. Issues and Challenges in the Practice of Performance
Appraisal Activities in the 21st Century. International Journal of Education and Research,
1(4), pp. 1-8.
Cappelli, P. & Tavis, A., 2016. The Performance Management Revolution. [Online]
Available at: https://hbr.org/2016/10/the-performance-management-revolution
[Accessed 18 05 2019].
Cintrón, R. & Flaniken, F., n.d. Performance Appraisal: A Supervision or Leadership Tool?.
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(7), pp. 29-37.
Daoanis, L. E., 2012. Performance Appraisal System: It's Implication to Employee
Performance. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, 2(3), pp. 55-62.
Farrell, A., 2013. An investigation into Performance Appraisal effectiveness from the
perception of Employees in an Irish Consumer Services Company. [Online]
Available at: http://trap.ncirl.ie/829/1/amiefarrell.pdf
[Accessed 18 05 2019].
Gogoi, K. & Baruah, P., 2016. An Ethical Evaluation of Performance Appraisal System. The
NEF Journal of Commerce and Management, 6(1), pp. 1-12.
Hossein, R. D., Saleh, P. A., Iman, A. M. & Jaafar, A., 2012. An Analysis of the
Empowerment level of Employees and It’s Relation to Organizational Factors. International
Journal of Business and Social Science , 3(15), pp. 255-263.
Jagtap, S. P., 2017. 360 Degree Feedback Tool – Pros and Cons. International Journal of
Management and Commerce Innovations, 5(2), pp. 1-4.

8
Kadam, R. N., 2012. Performance Appraisal and Human Resource Management: A
Challenge Before India. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and
Social Sciences, 1(4), pp. 91-96.
Kanaslan, E. K. & Iyem, C., 2016. Is 360 Degree Feedback Appraisal an Effective Way of
Performance Evaluation?. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and
Social Sciences, 6(5), pp. 172-182.
Kondrasuk, J. N., 2011. So What Would An Ideal Performance Appraisal Look Like?.
Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 12(1), pp. 57-71.
Mathison, D. L. & Vinja, V. N., 2010. The Annual Performance Review As A Positive
Source For Employee Motivation?. Journal of Business & Economics Research , 8(12), pp.
111-120.
Rolle, C. & Klingner, D., 2012. Performance Appraisal Systems as a Strategic Human
Resource Management Tool in the Bahamian Public Service. International Journal of Public
Administration, Volume 35, pp. 303-314.
Sharma, D., 2010. Performance Appraisal and Management. 1 ed. Mumbai: Himalaya
Publishing House.
Sillup, G. P. & Klimberg, R. K., 2010. Assessing the ethics of implementing performance
appraisal systems. Journal of Management Development, 29(1), pp. 38-55.
Toppo, L. & Prusty, T., 2012. From Performance Appraisal to Performance Management.
Journal of Business and Management, 3(5), pp. 1-6.